Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ms maggie

Who says this WH is dysfunctional???

57 posts in this topic

10 minutes ago, EGoldstein said:

It really doesn't take a Psychiatrist to tell you that the President is acting, shall we say eccentric.  As you said, the tweets are far from acting mature, let alone presidential.    

Yes, so why do we have psychiatrists diagnosing a guy they never met?  Trump has been a performer all his life.  I really didn't expect him to become Al Gore when he was elected.  

And if you were in his shoes and getting 90+% negative press coverage, would you reach out directly to the public or see if you could kiss the *** of the hostile press and make the late night hosts love you?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jdsample said:

Yes, so why do we have psychiatrists diagnosing a guy they never met?  Trump has been a performer all his life.  I really didn't expect him to become Al Gore when he was elected.  

And if you were in his shoes and getting 90+% negative press coverage, would you reach out directly to the public or see if you could kiss the *** of the hostile press and make the late night hosts love you?  

 

For the same reason we had people (some in Congress and the White House) diagnosing Terri Schiavo remotely.  It sells.  What does being a performer have to do with anything?  You would think that as much as the right wing despises performers, they would never elect one, yet it seems to be a GOP specialty, now two performers have been GOP presidents.  

First I wouldn't be in his shoes, the office doesn't pay enough for all the abuse.  And if he didn't expect it, then he really is an idiot, look at the abuse he himself heaped upon the former president.  However, if forced into the situation, I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to p***-off the press, Fox included.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, EGoldstein said:

For the same reason we had people (some in Congress and the White House) diagnosing Terri Schiavo remotely.  It sells.  What does being a performer have to do with anything?  You would think that as much as the right wing despises performers, they would never elect one, yet it seems to be a GOP specialty, now two performers have been GOP presidents.  

First I wouldn't be in his shoes, the office doesn't pay enough for all the abuse.  And if he didn't expect it, then he really is an idiot, look at the abuse he himself heaped upon the former president.  However, if forced into the situation, I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to p***-off the press, Fox included.    

You are absolutely right on Shaivo.  That was pure buffoonery.  

You have to admit politics is a performance art.  Reagan was a full time performer, Trump a part timer.  Franken full time.  I am convinced there is some value in that training, though I have never taken a drama class in my life.  Last thing I did was play a tree in 2nd grade.  Mom had to buy me a green shirt and brown pants.  

But just by coincidence I happened to end up sitting on a flight next to the drama professor at the college where I taught.  (It is small enough that there is only one drama professor and one physics professor so we had that in common.)  But we talked at length about the value of just a bit of drama training.  Since I was on the pre-med committee that helped students get to med schools, he gave me examples of his students who were also my students getting through interviews because they had learned to just open up and be positive when they were under stress.  Certainly some people come by that naturally, and if not, you can learn it it a non-academic setting.  But I came to respect what he brought to the students of our college.  Most of my life I regarded the "liberal arts" as bull majors.  But after a career in physics and engineering I read nothing but history and economics and other bull major stuff.  I haven't graduated to poetry yet.   

But when I say "liberal arts" I am betraying the original meaning.  Liberal arts once included math and natural science.  An educated man could quote Shakespeare as well as Pascal and Newton.  

 

Quote

"It is by no means enough that an officer of the Navy should be a capable mariner. He must be that, of course, but also a great deal more. He should be as well a gentleman of liberal education, refined manners, punctilious courtesy, and the nicest sense of personal honor.

He should be the soul of tact, patience, justice, firmness, kindness, and charity. No meritorious act of a subordinate should escape his attention or be left to pass without its reward, even if the reward is only a word of approval.

Conversely, he should not be blind to a single fault in any subordinate, though at the same time, he should be quick and unfailing to distinguish error from malice, thoughtlessness from incompetency, and well meant shortcomings from heedless or stupid blunder. In one word, every commander should keep constantly before him the great truth, that to be well obeyed, he must be perfectly esteemed."

https://www.usna.edu/StrategicPlan/naval_officer_quals.php
 

Edited by jdsample

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ms maggie said:

And the House just re-upped, led by Paul Ryan. 

And you're missing the point here. FISA is designed to collect intel on foreigners on foreign soil only. The NSA is spying on US citizens on US soil by the millions. In 2016 FISa approved only 42 requests to spy on foreigners yet the NSA spied on 151 million Americans on US soil the same year. Trump believes he was spied on. Although Trump is for FISA he does not want the abuses to continue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, flyboy56 said:

And you're missing the point here. FISA is designed to collect intel on foreigners on foreign soil only. The NSA is spying on US citizens on US soil by the millions. In 2016 FISa approved only 42 requests to spy on foreigners yet the NSA spied on 151 million Americans on US soil the same year. Trump believes he was spied on. Although Trump is for FISA he does not want the abuses to continue. 

FISA allows Americans who are communicating with foreigners to be spied on with the appropriate warrant. The 151 mm refers to metadata, which doesn't include content, just contact info. You may well object to that, but don't imply it's "spying" in the sense of the 42 warrants.

And my point is Trump doesn't know what he's for or against. 

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After more than one year and literally hundreds of foolish, vile, or non-sequitur tweets from the Stable Genius, one would think that he would learn to take a step back and perhaps become more reflective and strategic before releasing the word-diarrhea.

But no. 

His verbal statements are also erratic, unfocused and stupid sounding. The man can't even speak in full sentences. 

When he does speak in full sentences it's because he is reading a teleprompter, awkwardly, like a lackluster 9th grader reciting a book-report, with grandiose baloney text written by Stephen Miller.

I used to think George W was shameful with his phony Texas drawl, but this is on another level.

Edited by dogstarman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jdsample said:

Yes, so why do we have psychiatrists diagnosing a guy they never met?  Trump has been a performer all his life.  I really didn't expect him to become Al Gore when he was elected.  

And if you were in his shoes and getting 90+% negative press coverage, would you reach out directly to the public or see if you could kiss the *** of the hostile press and make the late night hosts love you?  

 

really twisted logic on this one....

why do you think he gets negative coverage? because he's so likeable and thoughtful?.....

if I was in his shoes (I can't imagine being that ignorant, uninformed, and angry...but I'll try) I wouldn't be antagonizing every demographic that isn't white, frightened, and ignorant....but that's just me. There is no place to hide once you've exposed yourself to be a malignant human being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

FISA allows Americans who are communicating with foreigners to be spied on with the appropriate warrant. The 151 mm refers to metadata, which doesn't include content, just contact info. You may well object to that, but don't imply it's "spying" in the sense of the 42 warrants.

And my point is Trump doesn't know what he's for or against. 

well said.......thank you for being an informed citizen....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, flyboy56 said:

And you're missing the point here. FISA is designed to collect intel on foreigners on foreign soil only. The NSA is spying on US citizens on US soil by the millions. In 2016 FISa approved only 42 requests to spy on foreigners yet the NSA spied on 151 million Americans on US soil the same year. Trump believes he was spied on. Although Trump is for FISA he does not want the abuses to continue. 

wrong.....ms maggie educated you...let me add this, your hero has the ability to confirm whether he was or was not "spied on"....the POTUS has to approve the action, which means what? the warrants are official government records and by law are required to be stored and retained....the giant orange dotard has access to the FISA records. He's lying and you, being the obedient sycophant, are blindly following instead of asking yourself "doesn't he have access to those records? "couldn't he verify this himself?"......here's your sign....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

FISA allows Americans who are communicating with foreigners to be spied on with the appropriate warrant. The 151 mm refers to metadata, which doesn't include content, just contact info. You may well object to that, but don't imply it's "spying" in the sense of the 42 warrants.

And my point is Trump doesn't know what he's for or against. 

And a 151 million Americans were suspected of communicating with foreign spies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, flyboy56 said:

And a 151 million Americans were suspected of communicating with foreign spies?

No. Those were metadata collections, no content collected. 

As I said, you're conflating with the outcomes of the 42 FISA warrants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, can you hear me now! said:

really twisted logic on this one....

why do you think he gets negative coverage? because he's so likeable and thoughtful?.....

if I was in his shoes (I can't imagine being that ignorant, uninformed, and angry...but I'll try) I wouldn't be antagonizing every demographic that isn't white, frightened, and ignorant....but that's just me. There is no place to hide once you've exposed yourself to be a malignant human being.

What is funny is the press gives positive coverage to the most left wing republicans until they win the primary.  At which point they go for the throat.  It worked with McCain.  You kind of backfired with Trump.  You thought he was the leftist looniest candidate out there and oops.  Time to change your Depends.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jdsample said:

What is funny is the press gives positive coverage to the most left wing republicans until they win the primary.  At which point they go for the throat.  It worked with McCain.  You kind of backfired with Trump.  You thought he was the leftist looniest candidate out there and oops.  Time to change your Depends.  

You know why Trump gets negative coverage?

Because he's an ignorant, mean-spirited buffoon.  Hard to put lipstick on that pig. 

McCain is a left wing Republican?  Huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, jdsample said:

Yes, so why do we have psychiatrists diagnosing a guy they never met?  Trump has been a performer all his life.  I really didn't expect him to become Al Gore when he was elected.  

And if you were in his shoes and getting 90+% negative press coverage, would you reach out directly to the public or see if you could kiss the *** of the hostile press and make the late night hosts love you?  

 

if i was getting 90% negative reviews, I'd stop a moment and consider if there was anything in my performance that was leading a vast majority of people with a brain in their heads to say I was unfit. Then I would stop sending idiotic tweets, turn off Fox and Friends, and actually do my homework.

That's what most rationale people would do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2018 at 7:12 PM, jdsample said:


We did not have a NBC to filter and interpret FDR's fireside chats and speculate on his sanity.  

Actually, his Fireside chats were broadcast on NBC.

And guess what, this is what it means to be president... You realize that people are going to pay attention to what you say and parse your words so you take a moment to choose your words carefully.

FDR did

Truman did

Eisenhower did

JFK did

LBJ did

Nixon did

Ford did

Carter did

Reagan did (sometimes)

Bush did

Clinton did

Bush did

Obama did

Trump is a ... moron and I gotta wonder about people like you who go to such lengths to defend behavior that is clearly unpresidential.

Edited by Baltimatt
Language

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2018 at 9:48 AM, JoyinMudville said:

Actually, his Fireside chats were broadcast on NBC.

And guess what, this is what it means to be president... You realize that people are going to pay attention to what you say and parse your words so you take a moment to choose your words carefully.

FDR did

Truman did

Eisenhower did

JFK did

LBJ did

Nixon did

Ford did

Carter did

Reagan did (sometimes)

Bush did

Clinton did

Bush did

Obama did

Trump is ... moron and I gotta wonder about people like you who go to such lengths to defend behavior that is clearly unpresidential.

 

^^^^^^This^^^^^

Edited by Baltimatt
Language in quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jdsample said:

Nobody more competent ran.  

That's a giant load of bull.

In the Republican field you had former governors, CEO's, Senators, and a guy who used to be speaker of the house of representatives. They were all more competent.

The Democrats ran a lawyer who's resume includes Senator, Secretary of State, and First Lady.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2018 at 8:38 AM, mcorioles said:

Yeah all this chaos yet the economy is exploding.

Nibody's listening no matter how much you guys rant.

lol@u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jdsample said:

I think posting tweets is a new low for this forum  When did tweets become news sources?  

I know it's tough for Donny's defenders to see him make an *** of himself in real time. It's bad for our country too.

Are you so ashamed of Donny's belligerence that you want to censor his tweets? It may not be a bad idea. 

P.S. The censored word, ***, is short for "the opening at the end of the alimentary canal through which solid waste matter leaves the body".

Edited by FatBoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoyinMudville said:

if i was getting 90% negative reviews, I'd stop a moment and consider if there was anything in my performance that was leading a vast majority of people with a brain in their heads to say I was unfit. Then I would stop sending idiotic tweets, turn off Fox and Friends, and actually do my homework.

That's what most rationale people would do.

If you put an R next to your last name, you would be in exactly that position.  That is all it takes.  It doesn't matter if you are a longtime Clinton pal and Clinton donor and most of the country thinks you are a leftist kook.  It only takes one R and 90% of the media will vomit negative reviews.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jdsample said:

If you put an R next to your last name, you would be in exactly that position.  That is all it takes.  It doesn't matter if you are a longtime Clinton pal and Clinton donor and most of the country thinks you are a leftist kook.  It only takes one R and 90% of the media will vomit negative reviews.  

When the R's stop doing stupid and hurtful stuff, the 'media' will stop reporting it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FatBoy said:

I know it's tough for Donny's defenders to see him make an *** of himself in real time. It's bad for our country too.

Are you so ashamed of Donny's belligerence that you want to censor his tweets? It may not be a bad idea. 

P.S. The censored word, ***, is short for "the opening at the end of the alimentary canal through which solid waste matter leaves the body".

Biologically speaking, the opening to which you refer is variously called an ******** or a rectum.  An *** includes that of course but a great deal more.  When you walk down the street and see a shapely woman and no longer blurt out (in fear of losing your job), "that is a nice ***" you are not referring to her rectum or ******** which presumably is not visible unless she is wearing a Saran Wrap bikini.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, FatBoy said:

Are you so ashamed of Donny's belligerence that you want to censor his tweets? It may not be a bad idea. 

I am not going to defend his tweets, but I will surely defend his right to send them.  I guess the First Amendment doesn't matter to you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jdsample said:

I think posting tweets is a new low for this forum  When did tweets become news sources?  

 

8 minutes ago, jdsample said:

I am not going to defend his tweets, but I will surely defend his right to send them.  I guess the First Amendment doesn't matter to you.  

So, just to be clear, you defend his right to send messages via Twitter but you don't want people to re-post them on this forum. Is that accurate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ms maggie said:

You know why Trump gets negative coverage?

Because he's an ignorant, mean-spirited buffoon.  Hard to put lipstick on that pig. 

McCain is a left wing Republican?  Huh?

Before the election I would have agreed with you on Trump.  All I knew was he appeared to have destroyed the USFL, painted his name on everything from hotels to boxcars, and had a game show in which the biggest backstabber won the honor to be his "apprentice."  Pretty sad when that is the best option on the ballot.  

But I have been pleasantly surprised since the election.  The tax reform bill was not written by him, but he was the primary cheerleader for it.  It is imperfect, but an improvement over what we had.  The same can be said of the failed repeal and replace bill.  

I guess I agree that he might not be a policy wonk, but he knows what he believes and is smart enough to have surrounded himself with wonks and is smart enough to listen to them.  

Had Hillary, who is arguably an angry hateful policy wonk won the election, Wal*Mart employees would be 22% poorer today.  And have higher taxes on those lesser earnings.  And meanwhile Hillary would import as many illegals as possible to undercut their wages even more.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0